So the U.S. government that was surprised by Vladimir Putin’s takeover of Crimea, surprised by his invasion of eastern Ukraine, surprised by his plan to sell S-300 missiles to Iran, and surprised by his intervention in Syria now thinks the Russian strongman will sue for peace in Syria on U.S. terms and oust Bashar Assad.

“Russia’s intervention is a powerful example of the law of unintended consequences,” said Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken at a security conference in Bahrain this weekend. “It will have two primary effects. First, it will increase Russia’s leverage over Assad. But second, it will increase the conflict’s leverage over Russia. And that in turn creates a compelling incentive for Russia to work for, not against, a political transition.”

Secretary of State John Kerry’s right-hand man even used a Vietnam War-era word to describe Mr. Putin’s supposed predicament: “The quagmire will spread and deepen, drawing Russia further in.”

Somehow we doubt Mr. Putin feels so beleaguered. So far his intervention in Syria has stabilized Mr. Assad’s regime and let the Syrian go on offense principally against rebels who are fighting both him and Islamic State. Russia has done so at the relatively modest cost of some weapons transfers, bombing runs, and 2,000 or so military advisers.

Mr. Putin was also able to midwife Iran’s presence at the peace talks for the first time. Mr. Kerry acquiesced to Iran’s participation and strong-armed our Sunni Arab allies to go along. The Obama Administration’s diplomatic logic seems to be that Iran will also throw over its long-time satrap in Damascus now that it has a seat at the table and Mr. Assad is stronger. In victory, it will surrender.

Where’s Richard Holbrooke when you need him? The diplomat, who died in 2010, understood that durable settlements are possible only when the U.S. negotiates from a position of strength. He was able to negotiate peace in the Balkans in the mid-1990s after he convinced President Bill Clinton to secretly arm Croatia against marauding Serbia. Mr. Clinton also supported NATO bombing to stop Serbian predations in Bosnia.

Only after the balance of forces on the ground had evened out did the Serbs seriously negotiate a settlement. It’s a measure of this Administration’s detachment from Middle East reality that it won’t even learn from successful Democratic foreign intervention.

It’s not as if President Obama lacks military options to make a difference in Syria. Yet he has rejected every serious Pentagon proposal. He won’t create a no-fly zone in Syria to protect refugees and anti-Assad rebels because it risks upsetting Russia and his antiwar domestic base. And he won’t deploy U.S. Apache attack helicopters to assist coalition ground forces because he doesn’t want to too obviously contradict his claim that he ended the Iraq war.

Instead Mr. Obama announced last week he will dispatch all of 50 U.S. special forces soldiers to assist Kurdish troops who are fighting Islamic State. It isn’t clear what their mission will be or how far they will be deployed into Syria. No soldiers in the world are more capable than U.S. special operators, and presumably they’d be able to call in air support when needed.

But so small a force is also far more vulnerable to being killed or captured by Islamic State forces. The deployment sounds more like an attempt by the White House to respond to its Russian humiliation by showing Americans it is at least doing something more against Islamic State. But it doesn’t seem to be part of a serious new military strategy.

If Mr. Obama really wants to put pressure on Russia and Iran to negotiate in Syria he would create a Sunni alternative to both Mr. Assad and Islamic State. This would include destroying Mr. Assad’s air force, which the U.S. military could easily do, while joining with Syria’s neighbors and Europeans to create a no-fly zone for refugees and anti-regime and anti-ISIS forces.

The President could also raise the cost of Russia’s serial foreign adventures. This would include arming Ukraine so it can defend itself against Russian incursions, and strengthening sanctions to raise domestic political pressure on Mr. Putin.

Mr. Obama will do none of this. Instead he will send out Messrs. Kerry and Blinken to assert that U.S. retreat is really success, that Russian advances are really defeat, and that five years of war will soon yield to peace because Mr. Obama believes against all Syrian evidence that the arc of history bends his way.